Thoughts on Charasmatic Renewal

[DavidFilmer]

Especially the bold claim that Charismatic Catholicism
is out-and-out Satanic.

No, I said the practice of speaking in tongues is out-and-out Satanic (ie, from the Devil, not from God). Unfortunately this practice is (so far) inseparably linked to the Charismatic movement (Catholic or otherwise).

The practice brought nothing but trouble in Corinth. It was disrupting the liturgy and was a subject of derision, needlessly reflecting poorly upon the early Christian community and hindering the Gospel message. It was dividing the community, being used as a type of status symbol of superiority.

It was not from God then. It is not from God now.

Who do you know of that wants to sew discord and disunity among the Church?

Spiritually, Corinth was the weakest of all early Christian communities. These people were the least formed in the Faith, and were an easy target. Satan was the marksman, and speaking in tongues was his ammo.

 

[MOTHBALL83]

No, I said the practice of speaking in tongues is out-and-out Satanic (ie, from the Devil, not from God). Unfortunately this practice is (so far) inseparably linked to the Charismatic movement (Catholic or otherwise).

The practice brought nothing but trouble in Corinth. It was disrupting the liturgy and was a subject of derision, needlessly reflecting poorly upon the early Christian community and hindering the Gospel message. It was dividing the community, being used as a type of status symbol of superiority.

It was not from God then. It is not from God now.

Who do you know of that wants to sew discord and disunity among the Church?

Spiritually, Corinth was the weakest of all early Christian communities. These people were the least formed in the Faith, and were an easy target. Satan was the marksman, and speaking in tongues was his ammo.

Was it Catholics speaking in tongues in Corinth or some other sect like gnostics or motanists?

 

[DavidFilmer]

Was it Catholics speaking in tongues in Corinth or some other sect like gnostics or motanists?

I’m pretty sure that some of the heretical sects did this, I was referring to the situation that Paul describes in First Corinthians. The practice of speaking in unknown tongues brought nothing but trouble to this community.

 

[Michael_Francis]

Please be advised that no violation of the Forum Rules has occurred thus far in this discussion and DF has made his case with clarity and charity as well as documented facts, so please remain on topic and do not discuss mod activities on the open forum.

If one wishes to refute anything stated thus far, then one should do so with the same clarity and charity as well as documented facts and let the discussion flow from there.
God’s peace,

 

[vardaquinn]

Hmm, been looking at threads on the Charismatic Renewal lately, and I saw this one so I thought I’d correct a few things.

No, I said the practice of speaking in tongues is out-and-out Satanic (ie, from the Devil, not from God). Unfortunately this practice is (so far) inseparably linked to the Charismatic movement (Catholic or otherwise).

The practice brought nothing but trouble in Corinth. It was disrupting the liturgy and was a subject of derision, needlessly reflecting poorly upon the early Christian community and hindering the Gospel message. It was dividing the community, being used as a type of status symbol of superiority.

It was not from God then. It is not from God now.

Who do you know of that wants to sew discord and disunity among the Church?

Spiritually, Corinth was the weakest of all early Christian communities. These people were the least formed in the Faith, and were an easy target. Satan was the marksman, and speaking in tongues was his ammo.

No no no no… Where are you pulling this from? That does not sound at all like what St. Paul is saying when he says “I would like all of you to pray in tongues” and “I give thanks I pray in tongues more than any of you” and “he who prays in a tongue edifies himself” and when you gather together, have someone come with a hymn, a tongue, a prophecy, etc. and his many injunctions to pray in the Spirit every chance you get. Obviously, from what St. Paul says in 1 Corinthinans 14, he absolutely did not think it was demonic and encouraged it.

I have the gift of prayer tongues, and it has brought me nothing but grace.

Now, Satanics might indeed speak in tongues. St. Thomas Aquinas has an interesting idea that the charisms are actually given through angels. Thus Satan, as a fallen angel, could potentially have someone speaking in tongues. But, as Chesterton points out, this no more disproves the reality than a counterfeit note disproves the bank of England. Because there’s a fake, that’s a could sign there something that it’s faking.

The Corinthians were abusing the form of tongues that was meant for instruction - doing it, but without interpretation, in a way that was disrupting the liturgy.

Yeah, speaking in tongues is very good, and in fact from what Paul says, it should be something all of us should be doing.

 

[NewsTheMan]

Hmm, been looking at threads on the Charismatic Renewal lately, and I saw this one so I thought I’d correct a few things.

No no no no… Where are you pulling this from? That does not sound at all like what St. Paul is saying when he says “I would like all of you to pray in tongues” and “I give thanks I pray in tongues more than any of you” and “he who prays in a tongue edifies himself” and when you gather together, have someone come with a hymn, a tongue, a prophecy, etc. and his many injunctions to pray in the Spirit every chance you get. Obviously, from what St. Paul says in 1 Corinthinans 14, he absolutely did not think it was demonic and encouraged it.

I have the gift of prayer tongues, and it has brought me nothing but grace.

Now, Satanics might indeed speak in tongues. St. Thomas Aquinas has an interesting idea that the charisms are actually given through angels. Thus Satan, as a fallen angel, could potentially have someone speaking in tongues. But, as Chesterton points out, this no more disproves the reality than a counterfeit note disproves the bank of England. Because there’s a fake, that’s a could sign there something that it’s faking.

The Corinthians were abusing the form of tongues that was meant for instruction - doing it, but without interpretation, in a way that was disrupting the liturgy.

Yeah, speaking in tongues is very good, and in fact from what Paul says, it should be something all of us should be doing.

That’s not how I understand St.Paul.

9 So it is with you.** Unless you speak intelligible words with your tongue, how will anyone know what you are saying?** You will just be speaking into the air. 10 Undoubtedly there are all sorts of languages in the world, yet none of them is without meaning. 11 If then I do not grasp the meaning of what someone is saying, I am a foreigner to the speaker, and the speaker is a foreigner to me. 12 So it is with you. Since you are eager for gifts of the Spirit, try to excel in those that build up the church.

18 I thank God that I speak in tongues more than all of you. 19 But in the church** I would rather speak five intelligible words to instruct others than ten thousand words in a tongue. **

 

[Le_Cracquere]

No, I said the practice of speaking in tongues is out-and-out Satanic (ie, from the Devil, not from God). Unfortunately this practice is (so far) inseparably linked to the Charismatic movement (Catholic or otherwise).

The practice brought nothing but trouble in Corinth. It was disrupting the liturgy and was a subject of derision, needlessly reflecting poorly upon the early Christian community and hindering the Gospel message. It was dividing the community, being used as a type of status symbol of superiority.

It was not from God then. It is not from God now.

Who do you know of that wants to sew discord and disunity among the Church?

Spiritually, Corinth was the weakest of all early Christian communities. These people were the least formed in the Faith, and were an easy target. Satan was the marksman, and speaking in tongues was his ammo.

One can question the efficacy or validity of such practices without proceeding straight to the “SATAAAAAAN!” Being raised in a Charismatic Protestant church, I was always a little suspicious of what it was accomplishing and how “inspired” it was at times, but there was never any reason to doubt that its practitioners were moved by sincere love of God, or by anything that would please Old Nick in the slightest.

So a touch of theological modesty might here be in order. As would be choosing your words especially carefully on this subject: I’d hate to think you were implying that folks such as my sainted Pentecostal mother (R.I.P.) are practicing some sort of crypto-Satanism.

 

[yablabo]

Hi. I am relatively new to the site. Was curious as to what people thought about the Charasmatic Renewal i.e. Speaking in Tongues and Prophecy etc.

My thoughts are: Obedience is the hallmark of a Christian. Therefore, if you find disobedience to Bishops, pastors and binding teachings and laws of the Popes in this “Charismatic Renewal,” then you know the tree by its fruits…

– Nicole

 

[Fink]

I am not a Charismatic, but I am troubled by some of the accusations against
the movement in this thread.

…There was heavy*** Franciscan presence***, along with Mother Teresa’s
sisters in attendance, along with speaker*** Sister Briege McKenna***, whom I think is
a very lovely and Godly Catholic woman. She happens to believe in Divine Healings occuring even today. I have never heard Sister Briege speak in “tongues,” though.

God bless all of you.

There`s something about Sr. Briege McKenna which is more than a bit disturbing.
To quote from “Medjugorje Revisited” by Donal Foley, published byTheotokos Books. Page 15:

Shortly before the visions began [on the 24th of June 1981], an important Charismatic conference was held in Rome, in May 1981. We are told that,

Fr. Tomislav Vlasic … had gone to Rome for an international meeting of leaders of the Charismatic Renewal. During the conference, he asked some of the leaders to pray with him for the healing of the Church in Yugoslavia. One of those praying,*** Sr. Briege McKenna***, had a mental picture of Fr. Vlasic seated and surrounded by a great crowd; from the seat flowed streams of water. Another ***Fr. Emiliano Tardif ***], said in prophecy: “Do not fear, I am sending you My mother.”

[In October 1996, Fr. Tardif told the Italian journalist, Marino Parodi, that he was convinced that Vassula Ryden was a true mystic. Fr. Rene Laurentin (also a Charismatic) has/had the same conviction: ie faulty judgement on the part of both priests. Did they also misjudge Medjugorje?]

Donal Foley lays the ***responsibility ***for propagating “Medjugorje” on the shoulders of the Charismatic Movement.
Most of the involved Franciscans (eg Fr. Vlasic, Fr. Zovko) are/were Charismatics.
Donal Foley claims Fr. Laurentin pushed “Medjugorje” harder than any other single person.

We all know about the-now Mr Tomislav Vlasic.
Fr Zovko was finally sent into exile in 2009.

Is there a whiff of sulphur?

…but there was never any reason to doubt that its practitioners were moved by sincere love of God, or by anything that would please Old Nick in the slightest.

So a touch of theological modesty might here be in order. As would be choosing your words especially carefully on this subject: I’d hate to think you were implying that folks such as my sainted Pentecostal mother (R.I.P.) are practicing some sort of crypto-Satanism.

Nobody should think that of sincere, pious believers; but, Satan can fool anyone with the appropriate trap.

PS
David:
Thank you for all of the info.

 

[Shannon9791]

Personally, I feel that if the Charismatic movement brings individuals to the Church, then it is accomplishing it’s mission. That being said, I’ve found in my own experiences that each charismatic group tends to have its own “agenda” and “theologies” that make it different from what the original movement should be. At my old parish, I attended the charismatic prayer group for a while with other youth of the parish and they pushed speaking in tounges on all of us. Being young (16-17 or so) and fairly naive, I thought the individuals who led the group knew what they were doing and what they were talking about. I couldn’t have been more wrong.

They always talked about how “When Mary comes around, you smell roses” but what they didn’t tell you was that when they would annoint you with oil while you were “slain in the spirit” that the oil was rose scented. I only found this out after the leader of the group dropped his vial and I picked it up for him. That’s not only deceitful, but it’s promising something that may or may not be occuring. I went to that group off and on for a few years, but the final straw of my going to that group was when I was explicitly made an example of. I had the audacity to question the leader, in private, about some of the practices they did. I found it odd that the same lady could be “slain in the spirit” twice a week, and that for some reason, she’s the only person this phenomena happened to. I also asked about their speaking in tounges and how they felt and taught that unless you had that gift, your prayers weren’t as effective. Obviously, he had no answer for me and got defensive. At the next meeting, I was called out for questioning God and His movement and shunned by that group. Although it wasn’t that big a deal to me, it was a group of like 12 people or so and they were all old, the group leader had a discussion with our priest about me. Fortunately, my priest knew me well enough to know that I wasn’t someone out to destroy the Church or “God’s Movement” and that’s as far as it went.

Again, this is only my personal experience, but I’ve talked to enough people about it who have had stories of a similar nature, whether it’s being lied to or told things that “they feel are right” and not in accord with true Church teaching, and that questioning that is not a great idea. I always kinda looked at the whole movement as more of a fringe thing anyway.

 

[MOTHBALL83]

Personally, I feel that if the Charismatic movement brings individuals to the Church, then it is accomplishing it’s mission. That being said, I’ve found in my own experiences that each charismatic group tends to have its own “agenda” and “theologies” that make it different from what the original movement should be. At my old parish, I attended the charismatic prayer group for a while with other youth of the parish and they pushed speaking in tounges on all of us. Being young (16-17 or so) and fairly naive, I thought the individuals who led the group knew what they were doing and what they were talking about. I couldn’t have been more wrong.

They always talked about how “When Mary comes around, you smell roses” but what they didn’t tell you was that when they would annoint you with oil while you were “slain in the spirit” that the oil was rose scented. I only found this out after the leader of the group dropped his vial and I picked it up for him. That’s not only deceitful, but it’s promising something that may or may not be occuring. I went to that group off and on for a few years, but the final straw of my going to that group was when I was explicitly made an example of. I had the audacity to question the leader, in private, about some of the practices they did. I found it odd that the same lady could be “slain in the spirit” twice a week, and that for some reason, she’s the only person this phenomena happened to. I also asked about their speaking in tounges and how they felt and taught that unless you had that gift, your prayers weren’t as effective. Obviously, he had no answer for me and got defensive. At the next meeting, I was called out for questioning God and His movement and shunned by that group. Although it wasn’t that big a deal to me, it was a group of like 12 people or so and they were all old, the group leader had a discussion with our priest about me. Fortunately, my priest knew me well enough to know that I wasn’t someone out to destroy the Church or “God’s Movement” and that’s as far as it went.

Again, this is only my personal experience, but I’ve talked to enough people about it who have had stories of a similar nature, whether it’s being lied to or told things that “they feel are right” and not in accord with true Church teaching, and that questioning that is not a great idea. I always kinda looked at the whole movement as more of a fringe thing anyway.

I’m really surprised that Catholics would be acting this way. I have met some Pentecostals who are similar to this.

 

[Church_Militant]

My experiences and thing on all this can be seen at What I have learned about tongues…

 

[DavidFilmer]

One can question the efficacy or validity of such practices without proceeding straight to the “SATAAAAAAN!”

Well, I didn’t go straight there. And I’m not the first to recognize the origin of the practice of speaking in unknown tongues.

St. Claudius Apollinaris, Second Century Bishop of Hierapolis, staunchly defended the Faith from the errors of the Montanist heresy, known by its followers as the “New Prophesy.”

In his epic work, Ecclesiastical History (Book 5, Chapter 16), the Early Church Father Eusebius quotes the writings of one of St. Apollinaris priests which describes the “New Prophesy” movement. This is what he says:

Being recently in Ancyra in Galatia, I found the church there greatly agitated by this novelty, not prophecy, as they call it, but rather false prophecy, as will be shown.

A recent convert, Montanus by name, through his unquenchable desire for leadership, gave the adversary [ie, Satan] opportunity against him. And he became beside himself, and being suddenly in a sort of frenzy and ecstasy, he raved, and began to babble and utter strange things, prophesying in a manner contrary to the constant custom of the Church handed down by tradition from the beginning.

Some of those who heard his spurious utterances at that time were indignant, and they rebuked him as one that was possessed, and that was under the control of a demon, and was led by a deceitful spirit, and was distracting the multitude; and they forbade him to talk, remembering the distinction drawn by the Lord and his warning to guard watchfully against the coming of false prophets (Matthew 7:15). But others imagining themselves possessed of the Holy Spirit and of a prophetic gift, were elated and not a little puffed up; and forgetting the distinction of the Lord, they challenged the mad and insidious and seducing spirit, and were cheated and deceived by him. In consequence of this, he could no longer be held in check, so as to keep silence.

Thus by artifice, or rather by such a system of wicked craft, the devil, devising destruction for the disobedient, and being unworthily honored by them, secretly excited and inflamed their understandings which had already become estranged from the true faith. And he stirred up besides two women, and filled them with the false spirit, so that they talked wildly and unreasonably and strangely, like the person already mentioned. And the spirit pronounced them blessed as they rejoiced and gloried in him, and puffed them up by the magnitude of his promises. But sometimes he rebuked them openly in a wise and faithful manner, that he might seem to be a reprover.

And the arrogant spirit taught them to revile the entire universal Church under heaven, because the spirit of false prophecy received neither honor from it nor entrance into it.

For the faithful in Asia met often in many places throughout Asia to consider this matter, and examined the novel utterances and pronounced them profane, and rejected the heresy, and thus these persons were expelled from the Church and debarred from communion.

The holy bishops of that time attempted to refute the spirit in Maximilla, but were prevented by others who plainly co-operated with the spirit.

The people today who adhere to the practice of speaking in unknown tongues are no different than the people who were seduced by this spirit in the Second Century - they are good, well-intentioned people who have been fooled by the Great Deceiver and by those likewise deceived who are “prophesying in a manner contrary to the constant custom of the Church handed down by tradition from the beginning.”

 

[vardaquinn]

Well, I didn’t go straight there. And I’m not the first to recognize the origin of the practice of speaking in unknown tongues.

St. Claudius Apollinaris, Second Century Bishop of Hierapolis, staunchly defended the Faith from the errors of the Montanist heresy, known by its followers as the “New Prophesy.”

In his epic work, Ecclesiastical History (Book 5, Chapter 16), the Early Church Father Eusebius quotes the writings of one of St. Apollinaris priests which describes the “New Prophesy” movement. This is what he says:

The people today who adhere to the practice of speaking in unknown tongues are no different than the people who were seduced by this spirit in the Second Century - they are good, well-intentioned people who have been fooled by the Great Deceiver and by those likewise deceived who are “prophesying in a manner contrary to the constant custom of the Church handed down by tradition from the beginning.”

And consequently, many people since Montanism have associated charismatic gifts with the Montanists, and thus been turned away from them and it’s made things very difficult. Yeah.

 

[Road2Damascus]

It’s astounding how the Pentecostal movement is growing: pewforum.org/Christian/Evangelical-Protestant-Churches/Spirit-and-Power.aspx

By all accounts, pentecostalism and related charismatic movements represent one of the fastest-growing segments of global Christianity. According to the World Christian Database, at least a quarter of the world’s 2 billion Christians are thought to be members of these lively, highly personal faiths, which emphasize such spiritually renewing “gifts of the Holy Spirit” as speaking in tongues, divine healing and prophesying.]

I have serious reservations on it, I’ve read a few threads on this topic. None though that I have seen at least have pointed out that it is a rather popular religion in some parts of the globe. I have a Pentecostal buddy and this is exactly what he goes to, he says it’s growing and then will sometimes quote me that from Acts 2:

Douay-Rheims Bible
And it shall come to pass, in the last days, (saith the Lord,) I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams.

bible.cc/acts/2-17.htm

There is some reasoned debate here, not saying I’m on one side of this issue, just saying a balanced approach seems necessary and information has been scarce as to what a proper response is all in all except for some sage advice from some participants in this forum have said.

 

[Road2Damascus]

Hi. I am relatively new to the site. Was curious as to what people thought about the Charasmatic Renewal i.e. Speaking in Tongues and Prophecy etc.

I am not against this movement but if one is not sure of what they are saying and prophecy is mentioned as well, it seems “false prophecy” could be possible which the Bible warns us about.

Matthew 7:15, 1 John 4:1clearly warn us about “false prophets”. 1 John 4:1

“[1] Dearly beloved, believe not every spirit, but try the spirits if they be of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world.”

drbo.org/chapter/69004.htm

It’s not hard to read the news or watch tv or even movies and think some of these people interpreting prophecy from the Bible are not doing so accurately IN the popular media.

I have the apologetics book on Fundamentalists and Catholics, I know many of the responses to tell to other faiths that might come knocking on your door or you will meet otherwise but clear information as this thread has on phenomenon like speaking in tongues really is not found that easily at least from a Catholic source and chances are, one may meet those who evangelize about speaking in tongues and may be exposed to other ideas.

 

[christosdavid]

The church magisterium as seen from the documents provided by the CCC 2003-7 on charism in the church specifically mentions tongues as a Catholic charism.

This is a gift of the Holy Spirit, God.

The Dogmatic constitution of the Church (Lumen Gentium) also recognises these graces as having God as their author.

The warning note of course that they shouldn’t be sought rashly, moreover, no-one wants liturgical abuses, which cover quite a wide range of teachings and activites.

 

[Road2Damascus]

The church magisterium as seen from the documents provided by the CCC 2003-7 on charism in the church specifically mentions tongues as a Catholic charism.

This is a gift of the Holy Spirit, God.

The Dogmatic constitution of the Church (Lumen Gentium) also recognises these graces as having God as their author.

The warning note of course that they shouldn’t be sought rashly, moreover, no-one wants liturgical abuses, which cover quite a wide range of teachings and activites.

Well, yes, from the Archdiocese of Arlington Va. too along these lines, we were talking about this website about a week ago enumerated as CCC 798-801. I don’t believe this has been mentioned yet.

For example on “Gifts of the Holy Spirit”

They must be discerned: "It is in this sense that discernment of charisms is always necessary. No charism is exempt from being referred and submitted to the Church’s shepherds. ‘Their office [is] not indeed to extinguish the Spirit, but to test all things and hold fast to what is good,’ (1 Thessalonians 5:12,19-21) so that all the diverse and complementary charisms work together “for the common good.” (CCC 801)

They are to be used: St. John of the Cross provides further insights into the wise and humble use of charisms to help us use them as God intends.

arlingtonrenewal.org/gifts-of-the-holy-spirit

 

[DavidFilmer]

he says it’s growing and then will sometimes quote me that from Acts 2:

And it shall come to pass, in the last days, (saith the Lord,) I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams.

I’m not sure how this passage is supposed to support Charismatic Christianity (and especially the practice of speaking in unknown tongues, which is inseparably linked to the movement).

But whatever support this passage might lend is predicated on the assumption that we are, indeed, living in the “last days.” This assumption is taken for granted in most Charismatic circles, but there is not one shred of Biblical evidence (or any other form of evidence) that supports this conclusion. However, the Bible DOES say that it is impossible for us to know this - so this is just bad theology on top of bad theology (typical of most protestant spiritual movements).

There is another prophecy of Scripture - not restricted to the “last days” - which says,

For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine; but wanting to have their ears tickled, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance to their own desires. (2Tim 4:3).

Nobody listens to the Charismatic message and doesn’t *want *it to be true. It’s what everyone *wants *to hear.

 

[DavidFilmer]

The church magisterium as seen from the documents provided by the CCC 2003-7 on charism in the church specifically mentions tongues as a Catholic charism.

This is a gift of the Holy Spirit, God.

It does not mention speaking in unknown tongues.

There is both a legitimate and an illegitimate form of this charism. The legitimate form is what happened in Acts2 - speaking in known tongues. The illegitimate and corrupted form is what happened in 1Cor - speaking in unknown tongues (see my post #17 of this thread).

The Church has never promoted in any way whatsoever the practice of speaking in unknown tongues, which (in it’s recent incarnation) is a protestant practice which infiltrated the Catholic Church in 1968 (just 43 years ago).